* Present Status of River Linking and Political and Social Implications There is an immense pressure to share river waters among the countries, states and regions. The political and social issues are very important as they may decide the fate of this kind of projects of national importance. Mondal (2004) opined that the linking of rivers is more problematic for socio-economic cultural relations of the society. In South-East Asia, the Himalayan river waters are of interest, as the Himalayan region has some of the world‟s most underdeveloped/developing countries, Bangladesh, Nepal, India, Bhutan, Pakistan, Tibet, and China. Construction of dams across the Himalayan rivers Brahmaputra and Ganga and their main tributaries in India and Nepal and interlinking of their canal system and transfer of surplus flows of the eastern tributaries of the Ganga to the west in addition to linking of Ganga and Brahmaputra constitute implementation aspects of the main concept of inter basin transfer of water between the countries. While providing irrigation to additional 22 million hectares, it generates pollution free hydro-power and will provide flood control in the Ganga- Brahmaputra basin. Thus, Ganga- Brahmaputra basin, and Nepal and Bangladesh would have advantage from the project. But the initiation, completion and success of the scheme are contingent upon the cooperation and political environment in the countries, states and regions involved. It is easier said than done to advise the politicians to bury the hatchet for the welfare of the people. According to Narseen Jahanet al. (2003) of Bangladesh, the issue of the Himalayan Rivers is to be viewed in terms of geopolitical, socio-political, temporal, functional requirement and operational modes. They cite the conflicts regarding Farakka dam between India and Bangladesh. They emphasize that as India is the stronger party and geographically placed at a strategic position, she has a more important role to solve the regional conflicts and strive for the riparian agreements between the countries. As India is inherently liberal and ready to cooperate with neighbours and more so in the context of the important problem of water sharing, it can be a role model and pioneer for such riparian agreements The interlinking of rivers planned on the basis of studies of National Water Development Agency (NWDA-2003) of India envisages transfer of excess flood waters from Himalayan river component of Ganga and Brahmaputra, from Ganga to the parched lands of western India and from tributaries of Brahmaputra, Manas and Sankhosh (the sources of flood-misery to Assam and Bangladesh), to the east and southeaster parts of India. Water balance studies indicate availability of sufficient floodwaters for diversion. However, the links are still at the conceptual stage of planning. As per the reports, Bangladesh has fears and is creating disinformation in the world forum, that the mega projects, to be undertaken in India for diversion of waters from Ganga, would cause water scarcity in Bangladesh. But the flow data in Ganga and the quantum of water to be diverted reveal that Bangladesh has unnecessary fears. At least the transfer of water from Ganga to peninsular component does not affect the water status of Bangladesh. However, this has become a bone of contention for river-sharing between the countries. The Almatti dam over Krishna River in Karnataka is matter of controversy between Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. Controversies may also arise between the regions within the state like the supply of Godavari waters to Telangana region. In this scenario, where people are regional and linguistic conscious in India, inter-state and intra-state water conflicts are not uncommon (Ali 2004). In, fact whenever inter-basin transfer of water is proposed, it always met with strong resistance from the donor river basin, even though it has surplus water. Even intra-basin transfer of waters across the states and construction of dams are always the centres of controversy between the states as between Haryana and Punjab, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh etc. Already Bihar, West Bengal, Maharashtra, Kerala, Assam, Punjab and Rajasthan have opposed the inter basin transfer of waters. Another social issue of great importance is the displacement of the people from the region of linking. Forced displacement from the homeland is always painful and serious issue. The problem would be magnified and indiscriminately exploited by the politicians with their vested interests who instigate the people, especially the susceptible rural and tribal communities, who are likely to be displaced. There are many cases of non-settlement of issue of lands to the persons displaced from the link canal areas. When the proposed canals transfer water through other states or other regions in the same state, they are bound to claim water from the canal. If the claim is not acceded to, they try to thwart the project resulting in mutual distrust and more often in violent conflicts. Recently, when Government of Andhra Pradesh has proposed the construction of a dam over the river Vamsadhara at the Orissa-Andhra Pradesh border, the Government of Orissa has strongly objected, as it may inundate fields and forests on their side and that Andhra Pradesh may also extract more water from the Vamsadhara river basin. The Orissa Government has proposed and even given a go-ahead order for construction of 7or 8 dams over the river Vamsadhara, which would create severe water scarcity in the Srikakulam district. This kind of mutual distrust, and antagonism and conflicts, more due to vested interests and selfish mottos are to be tackled and an atmosphere of trust and belief is to be created before undertaking the projects like river linking. An example at intra-state conflict is the resistance offered by farmers of West Godavari district to dig Polavaram Right canal through their district for transfer of water to the Krishna River. Thus, violent opposition may occur and gather momentum between the states and also between the regions even within the same state. By its own admission, the Central Government recognizes, as a major hurdle, the managing a political consensus for this ambitious but all-important project. On the construction of Sutlej–Yamuna canal, which was to be completed by January 2003 by the Central Government, under the directive of the Supreme Court, had to be abandoned in 1990 after spending about Rs.450 crores, at the height of militancy in the Punjab. In the Cauvery dispute also, the Apex Court directed the Karnataka Government to release water into Mettur reservoir in Tamil Nadu to save the standing crop. No agreement could be reached between the states even in the hour of crisis and the then and also now impending starvation. Similarly no agreement could be reached, notwithstanding, the directive from the Supreme Court in case of Sardar Sarovar, Tehri and Bansagar projects, which have been languishing for 20 years, still are nowhere near completion, because the people could not be satisfactorily rehabilitated. Of course, the central Government is empowered by the Supreme Court to go ahead with the project of linking of rivers and to complete it within 10 years. It should be mentioned that the Apex Court, realizing the importance of the project, has compressed the proposed 30-years project into 10-years one. But, as experts feel, this is an impossible task, more so, in the current social atmosphere and political instability in the country and the huge expenditure. Practically considering, people‟s emotions and voice have more weight and say than the Supreme Court‟s directive in this kind of issues. Thus, the project will not be a reality by 2016. All these
Posted on: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 08:21:23 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015